↓ Skip to main content

NONADAPTIVE PROCESSES CAN CREATE THE APPEARANCE OF FACULTATIVE CHEATING IN MICROBES

Overview of attention for article published in Evolution, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
NONADAPTIVE PROCESSES CAN CREATE THE APPEARANCE OF FACULTATIVE CHEATING IN MICROBES
Published in
Evolution, November 2013
DOI 10.1111/evo.12306
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Adaptations to social life may take the form of facultative cheating, in which organisms cooperate with genetically similar individuals but exploit others. Consistent with this possibility, many strains of social microbes like Myxococcus bacteria and Dictyostelium amoebae have equal fitness in single-genotype social groups but outcompete other strains in mixed-genotype groups. Here we show that these observations are also consistent with an alternative, nonadaptive scenario: kin selection-mutation balance under local competition. Using simple mathematical models, we show that deleterious mutations that reduce competitiveness within social groups (growth rate, e.g.) without affecting group productivity can create fitness effects that are only expressed in the presence of other strains. In Myxococcus, mutations that delay sporulation may strongly reduce developmental competitiveness. Deleterious mutations are expected to accumulate when high levels of kin selection relatedness relax selection within groups. Interestingly, local resource competition can create nonzero "cost" and "benefit" terms in Hamilton's rule even in the absence of any cooperative trait. Our results show how deleterious mutations can play a significant role even in organisms with large populations and highlight the need to test evolutionary causes of social competition among microbes.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Poland 1 2%
Japan 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 56 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 23%
Researcher 13 21%
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 7%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 6 10%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 59%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 11%
Chemical Engineering 2 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 8 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 November 2013.
All research outputs
#18,584,604
of 27,801,710 outputs
Outputs from Evolution
#5,080
of 6,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,769
of 329,715 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evolution
#36
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,801,710 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,101 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,715 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.